Re: patch: autocomplete for functions

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: patch: autocomplete for functions
Date: 2012-03-16 17:47:54
Message-ID: 9966.1331920074@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
> On tor, 2012-03-15 at 16:36 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>> Excerpts from Peter Eisentraut's message of jue mar 15 16:25:53 -0300 2012:
>>> Isn't that just a subset of what I had proposed?
>>> http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/1328820579.11241.4.camel@vanquo.pezone.net

>> So do you intend to commit your patch?

> Well, there was quite a bit of discussion about it, but it appears that
> most concerns were addressed at the end. So yes, I guess, unless
> someone wants further discussion.

I'm a bit concerned about whether that's actually going to be useful.
A quick check shows that in the regression database, the proposed patch
produces 3246 possible completions, which suggests that by the time you
get down to a unique match you're going to have typed most of the name
anyway.

BTW, you should at least exclude dropped columns, I think.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2012-03-16 17:54:02 Re: [BUGS] BUG #6532: pg_upgrade fails on Python stored procedures
Previous Message Peter Eisentraut 2012-03-16 17:34:52 renaming domain constraint